It all started with someone handing out DVDs in a Federal Reserve museum,
continued with people being arrested on a public sidewalk for doing nothing,
and ended with a judge reaffirming that yes, you can video police.

John [?] wrote for Next News Network a 19 October 2013,

Federal Reserve Bank Settles Counterclaim with Journalist,

In May of 2011 in Missouri, Bruce Baumann was peacefully passing out
DVDs with his local media chapter, WeAreChange Colorado, outside the
Federal Reserve Bank in Kansas City. However, when Baumann and
fellow activist Ronald Lewis attempted to enter the Federal
Reserve’s money museum, they faced resistance from the private
bank’s security, which led to both of their arrest. Although this
resulted in ongoing litigation for nearly 30 months following the
incident, Baumann was confident that he would not only be successful
in defeating the charges, but he would also be victorious in
trampling the Federal Reserve Bank with a counterclaim.

Unbeknownst to Lewis, his name was previously recorded on a list due
to prior protests outside the bank, which prevented him from
entering the museum and Lewis was removed from the vestibule
security area. While exiting, Ronald Lewis was harassed by private
security. Instead of proceeding into the building, Baumann followed
Lewis outside and began videotaping the incident.

Baumann claims that an officer deceitfully pretended to be harmed by
Baumann in order to expand their jurisdiction outside the Federal
Bank and onto city property. They were then detained and charged
with interfering, resisting, and trespassing, as well as assaulting
a peace officer. Even though Bruce captured the incident on his cell
phone, it was subsequently confiscated by private security officers
and wasn’t introduced to the case for another 8 months.

The video Baumann took on his phone apparently was the evidence
that caused the prosecution to settle.

Statement from U.S. Department of Justice
supporting

the right of individuals to record police,

The United States addressed the central questions raised in this
case — whether individuals have a First Amendment right to
record police officers in the public discharge of their duties, and
whether officers violate individuals’ Fourth and Fourteenth
Amendment rights when they seize such recordings without a warrant
or due process — in a Statement of Interest filed in Sharp v.
Baltimore City Police Dept., et al., No. 1:11-cv-02888 (D. Md.),
attached here as Exhibit A. 1 Here, as there, the United States
urges the Court to answer both of those questions in the
affirmative.

We are the media.
Remember, you have in your pocket constitutional protection.

Here’s

the video:

-jsq